If you are new to the forums, you must register a free account before you can post. The forums have a separate registration from the rest of www.chronofhorse.com, so your log in information for one will not automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Slaughter does not solve neglect/starvation issues. There are still over 100,000 US horses going to slaughter. KB only buy the number of horses that there is a demand for. They are not buying skinny, old lame horses. The mentality of those that starve horses is warped. Again...the largest horse neglect case in TX happened when Dallas Crowne and Beltex was open and the ranch was within 20 min of them. It was owned by a VET. KB's also have dumped over 5000 horses in the desert to starve after they were rejected at the border. They have caused more abuse/neglect than those that legitimately cannot afford food/euth.

Having an export fee on horses and requiring breeder license fees, where the money would be divided among State Vet offices to be used for hay banks, gelding clinics, euth clinics would give those that need help, the resources to get it.

Most of the people starving horses mentally, don't believe they are neglecting horses. Look at the TB breeder that used to be on here, that starved a bunch of mares, or coloredcowhorse who neglected her horses (twice), and others who have multiple convictions. Slaughter has nothing to do with it. There was an auction pretty close to coloredcowhorses, and she never ran them thru there. Bullets are cheap, as is composting. Yet those people would never do that.

The mentality of those that abuse horses is warped.
So is that of those that want to kill and waste horses like old trash.
Killing them is ok, as long as they will not be used one more time thru slaughter?
That I think is also warped.

let me revisit this...the reason why these horses are being pulled off the range.....

Oh, right.
There are too many. There are native species depending on the same areas for survival.

Oh, horses are hard on the range. They are hard on the fields that are not delicate, but they are really destructive on the fragile eco system out west.
Which is arid to begin with and under drought conditions for some time now.

So, returning the horses to the range will irreparably damage the habitat, to the detriment of all living creatures, ensure the animals to die a slow death of starvation....

And I am sure this year we will ad a few hundred head more to the problem....

I dont think with the re-introduction of slaughter thats its going to slow down or stop the "nutter" from collecting horses and then starving them. The government is somewhat restricted in going in and confiscating the starving horses. In the event someone is hoarding and starving horses, I find it doubtful the government is going to step in, rescue the starving horses and then sell them at auction for slaughter. Those rescue horses are going most likely to local rescues and humane societies. I think its important to remember slaughter has always been a viable option to all those hoarding and starving their horses. Just because slaughter becomes legal in the U.S. is not going to stop the abuse of people starving their horses.
The media has a big hand in this as well. The media is stating its only the old and infirmed that go down the pipeline: no mention of the weanlings, the pregnant mare about ready to give birth etc. that go. Slaughter of horses is a multi-million dollar industry and so many want a piece of the pie. Its our heart strings for both sides of the fence that are being tugged at when it comes to this hot button topic.

Except those are absurd, like having animal control euthanize unwanted horses and send them to the landfill, like we do dogs and cats now.

.

I guess they could handle it like we do with the other 90% of horse's remains after they die.
Or they could shoot and kill and eat the horse themself. But they won't do that, because those using the slaughter system either want to just send the horse off and they can pretend it got a good home, so they can bury their head in the sand, or they just want to profit off the horse.

People can use the horse and not waste it if that was really a concern...(which to most of those usung slaughter, isn't). They can compost it, eat it themself, feed it to their dogs, donate to big cat sanctuary, donate to vet school. Noone HAS to send to slaughter for one last use. And the options I listed are far more humane.

My response was to her "let them go out and eat the grass on the thousands of acres". You are correct. Most ranchers use the bullet.

In our case, we keep all of them and they are euthanized when they fail. We are lucky as the ranch has been in the same hands with our family since 1876 even though it has been reduced in size. Between 1910 and 1960 the ranch had 30 + full time cattlehands and around 300 horses...we bred our own..

the point of slaughter is that a horse in good flesh has value, even if you can't ride it, lead it or even look at it without getting tears in your eyes.

That means it establishes a bottom line price for the low end critter.

That keeps people who can't afford the first bale of hay from buying the horse/foal because they have that much change in their pockets (have we already forgotten the 25-75 dollar auction prices?!)

It makes then more sense to let the animl go while it is still in good weight, vs trying to ride it out and letting everything go to heck in a hand basket.

No, it will never put a dent in the (ever growing) attitude of 'nobody can care fr my horse better than me'
Or whatever makes people think it's ok to have skinny animals while they are sitting down for supper with overflowing plates.

I dont think with the re-introduction of slaughter thats its going to slow down or stop the "nutter" from collecting horses and then starving them. The government is somewhat restricted in going in and confiscating the starving horses. In the event someone is hoarding and starving horses, I find it doubtful the government is going to step in, rescue the starving horses and then sell them at auction for slaughter. Those rescue horses are going most likely to local rescues and humane societies. I think its important to remember slaughter has always been a viable option to all those hoarding and starving their horses. Just because slaughter becomes legal in the U.S. is not going to stop the abuse of people starving their horses.
The media has a big hand in this as well. The media is stating its only the old and infirmed that go down the pipeline: no mention of the weanlings, the pregnant mare about ready to give birth etc. that go. Slaughter of horses is a multi-million dollar industry and so many want a piece of the pie. Its our heart strings for both sides of the fence that are being tugged at when it comes to this hot button topic.

There are many more crazy hoarders fueled by the rescue mentality, thanks to all those that, following animal rights extremist bandwagons, got on the "ban slaughter" agenda, one of the most lucrative ones for all those asking for donations.
Many hoarders now are doubly sure they are doing good, see, those horses starving in their pastures at least are not being slaughtered.

Slaughter is inherently not good or bad, is just one process by which we use one more of our renewable, natural resources some horses are.

To demonize slaughter, those groups use abuses as if that was the norm.
Anyone that is familiar with slaughter can tell you it is not, just as not all priests and teachers molest kids, not all policemen beat suspects.

Once people understand that, they get over thinking slaughter = abuse, I heard "them" say so, lets ban it.
Start thinking past that to, slaughter is a process we have use for millennia and we, like with everything else, are improving on it to make it the best we can.

As I already said, the difference here is, do you want to follow animal rights extremist thinking, "lets eliminate what we do with animals", period, to animal welfare concerns, "lets do what we do with our animals, whatever that may be, in the best way we know how".

I guess they could handle it like we do with the other 90% of horse's remains after they die.
Or they could shoot and kill and eat the horse themself. But they won't do that, because those using the slaughter system either want to just send the horse off and they can pretend it got a good home, so they can bury their head in the sand, or they just want to profit off the horse.

People can use the horse and not waste it if that was really a concern...(which to most of those usung slaughter, isn't). They can compost it, eat it themself, feed it to their dogs, donate to big cat sanctuary, donate to vet school. Noone HAS to send to slaughter for one last use. And the options I listed are far more humane.

Why would you think it is your place to tell others what to do with their horses?
If someone feels that using THEIR horse thru slaughter is what they want to do, it really is no business of anyone but the horse owner.

Would you like it if, now that people are learning it is not ok to just bury a carcass willy nilly, not very good for the environment, water, etc., now we ask there be laws to make EVERYONE send their unwanted/needing euthanizing horse to slaughter.

Gee, a close minded response from someone who supports slaughter. What a surprise!

It's not illegal now for an owner to slaughter and eat their own horse. Call someone up, have them shoot the horse, and butcher it and one has a freezer full of meat. Problem solved.

Yes, but you are following animal rights extremist groups, working to make horse meat illegal.

Remember, your rights really end at the feet of the rights of others, within already existing basic laws.

You may take other's rights away at the risk of yours also being trampled then.
Animal rights extremists don't take prisoners.
You follow them at the risk of your own rights being in their sights later.
Surely that should not have to be explained time and again?